Question GOV 03

GOV-03 Whose cultural guidance and permission should shape each place record, story, language item, map layer or lesson?

Start here · Questions · Progress · People decide

Why this matters

Working with the relevant custodians helps cultural material travel in the ways its holders choose.

What to bring back

A cultural engagement and permission register showing the material, the authority to establish, agreed uses, review and withdrawal routes and what remains private or undecided.

What we know so far

• comprehensive rebuild plan — reviewed source; public copy can be added through the evidence process (Section 8)
• supporting research — reviewed source; public copy can be added through the evidence process (Cultural governance and GAJRA source reviews)

AI-generated potential answers

For discussion and review · research checked 2026-10-20. These are AI-generated options and transfer assessments. The user's request and research method identify the source of this work. The source catalogue states what the references establish. The decision and approval record retains its own status.

Begin with relationships and permission from the relevant Quandamooka people for each knowledge item, place layer or lesson. Record who can decide, the agreed audience and uses, review arrangements and a practical withdrawal process.

Existing-practice adaptation

AI-generated adaptation of an existing pattern. Prepare an item-level permission register with the custodian's chosen wording and conditions. Keep public information, restricted knowledge and material awaiting permission distinct, and include paid or otherwise agreed participation arrangements in the project budget.

Research basis: AIATSIS Research Ethics Framework.

Future concept to explore

AI-generated future concept. Explore custodian-controlled permissions that accompany cultural material into Aura responses, XR scenes and learning resources. Future automated tools could check audience and reuse conditions before access, while custodians retain interpretation, release and review choices.

Examples and local differences

• AIATSIS Research Ethics Framework: AI transfer assessment: Make self-determination and accountable use part of the design from the beginning. Local difference to check: The framework is guidance for ethical research, not permission or a substitute for local relationships and authority.

Evidence to bring back next

• Agree the appropriate engagement process before requesting or publishing cultural material.
• Test whether a withdrawal reaches cached displays and derived learning versions.

People and connected choices

Who reviews: Relevant cultural custodians decide the conditions for their material and participation. Luke, as project initiator, prepares proposals and records the guidance and resulting design response; engagement pathways develop through actual agreement.

Connected questions: OPS-02, DAT-06

Work state: open. Assigned person or AI assistant: Ready to be assigned.

Research and alternatives can move ahead while connected decisions develop. Before acting on a choice, check the people, evidence and approved scope in People decide.